Hope the technology is able to back up the incoming legislation.would not a point zero zero zero one mean a fail.heres hoping the technology is reliable enough for the task otherwise things might get out there.Im thinking some leeway such as an error margin should have been considered .I wouldnt be happy if a machine fault led to a long legal hearing .zero is a good ideal but how realistic technologically is it.Still no worries for me im over the age .just thinking large that a zero is so exacting.lol
moosie_21,
May 12, 12:18am
I don't think a total ban would work in this country. We have been getting much better over the years, and it appears the message is getting through to most people. You should be allowed a beer or two maximum, there's nothing wrong with that I say.
cocabowla,
May 12, 12:19am
still wont make any difference if they arent out there TO catch them
skyline_guy_r34,
May 12, 12:19am
its measured in mg per litre of breath isnt it! and the on the road side test just test and give pass/failed youth/fail general.
So all they have to do is change the limits of alcohol detection on the fail youth down to say 20mg per litre. Anything under 20mg would surely be less than half a beer. theres no .001 the machine could not detect to that level.
Its all about where to put the allowance on that roadside tester. Li
therafter1,
May 12, 12:27am
There??
hutchk,
May 12, 12:31am
I don't drink either, and I can't understand the obsession with alcohol in this country - "I am going somewhere for social reasons therefore I must have a few." Are people unable to enjoy themselves without a couple of drinks onboard!
phalanax,
May 12, 12:32am
This is true.also i note the new legislation meanders on about folk tested within a certain range obviously aimed at generating stats to aid in looking at lowering or holding the current limit if so ideally those under the present youth rate would not qualify for this stat investigation.hmmm wonder how many folk with an under 100mcg have caused fatalities.surely enforcement is the best cure nonetheless I see merit in detering youth driving under the influence but seems to me zero is not very realistic technologically.Im thinking 20mcg would account for error and aprevious night spent at home imbibing . dont think its fair that some will get done for being responsible in the previous 24hrs.some leeway should surely be given.the drinking age is 18 this doesnt align either with the under 20 .seems a little mixed up im glad none of it applies to me
phalanax,
May 12, 12:34am
what if as you say you dont drink but your perfume or an ill calibrated device sends you over the zero.hope youre over 20
therafter1,
May 12, 12:37am
It is my understanding that you aren't dicked on the breath reading, you are dicked on a blood test that is taken after you fail the roadside breath tests.
phalanax,
May 12, 12:44am
Im thinking this new law looks good on paper but in practice is gonna leave our youth very vulnerable and the bottom line is we might very well end up with copsdeciding who walks and who goes to court.because zero is pathetically accurate yet erroneous technology might lead to innocents being labelled.its too shady for my liking
phalanax,
May 12, 12:48am
ok so the roadside youthsetting is zero and you fail because 50 drunken bobs have used the same tester in the last hour.doesnt make sense to have such an absolute limit to me.likewise at the station the tester has failed the 50 drunken bobs who are all over 400 you blow and get a point zero zero five by law your gone so you go for the blood test and that shows a zero zero four cause they swabbed you before putting the needle in its asking for trouble having zero I say.the new legislation was over thought theyve cooked it.lol.the doctors will be making a mint.lol.maybe they just want young blood.lol.
therafter1,
May 12, 12:49am
I think you may need to do a little homework on the procedure !
Shouldnt all our law be just and fair.the copshave the power not to act but is it right that they will decide on a case by case individualistic basis if a margin of errorapplies to zero.in engineering even most stringent measurements allow for a margin of + or - % zero is trouble.
smac,
May 12, 1:00am
I think you guys are missing the point a little here. There has always been an 'absolute limit', it's just that it's moved. If the equipment is as prone to error as you all think (source!!) then people will have been failing incorrectly all along. The problem does not get worse by applying a different limit.
From the little I know about how these things work, if anything I'd say a zero limit is LESS prone to error. A machine may report .030 when it should report 0.029, but report a positive when there is none!
DO any of you even know whether or not there is not already a margin of error built in to the testing procedure!!
phalanax,
May 12, 1:02am
This is not about folk having a drink its about what is fair and just.glad im over 20
johnf_456,
May 12, 1:04am
It is part of it, because drinking relates to driving while excessively under the influence of alcohol.
catgirl8,
May 12, 1:05am
moosie_21 wrote: I don't think a total ban would work in this country. We have been getting much better over the years, and it appears the message is getting through to most people. You should be allowed a beer or two maximum, there's nothing wrong with that I say.[/quote tell that to all the victims ofrepeat drunk drivers
smac,
May 12, 1:06am
IMHO, what is fair and just is having the fear of the axe put upon those who make the decision while already under the influence whether or not to drive. DO I drive after a drink! Yep. But I do so only if I have not already had a pre-determined amount. The problem is those who drink some random amount, THEN think they are fit to decide whether or not they are ok to drive.
phalanax,
May 12, 1:07am
I guess the first few not guilty hearings will get to the bottom of it all.
johnf_456,
May 12, 1:07am
I agree about the a drink or 2 max but the thing is alcohol effects everyone differently , so why it might not make a difference to some large bloke it could have the opposite affect on someone else from the same size drink. Hence its done by measurements on breath / blood.
therafter1,
May 12, 1:07am
I always thought that it was fair and just being able to drive down this countries roads without fear of the thought that there are partially zozzled idiots careering at you !
phalanax,
May 12, 1:17am
So as an above poster states no trifle for young scotty then.lol.dont use listerene.breath freshner.perfumes anything with an alcohol base.lol Maybe the machine does have a statistically averaged error margin built in but if it ever reads false then its not up to the absolute serious zero our law makers want.I mean how many health and beauty products get used by youths that are now raising their risk of failure.lets get real zero is zero.they should have made it reasonable 20mcg is reasonable.zero is a badly constructed ideal.
phalanax,
May 12, 1:19am
That wont change zero doesnt affect the over 20s.the most dangerous group is around 25 i think
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.